I can’t tell you what started it, but I am utterly fixated on hammer theory today.
Titanium hammers have always been in a special grey area, where manufacturer’s claims have always seemed a bit boastful.
Advertisement
And then, in 2011, Dewalt kicked off a new “weight of titanium, strength of steel” hammer that many other brands raced to match.
Dewalt’s explanation really bugged me at the time – I remember biting my tongue at the press luncheon – and continues to bug me even now.
How does Dewalt’s MIG-welded hammer (15 oz) work to provide “the feel of titanium at a fraction of the cost” while also delivering “the power of a 28oz framing hammer?”
They said something along the lines of:
Kinetic energy = 1/2 x mass x velocity ^2. So even though we lightened the weight of the hammer, users can swing it faster to deliver greater energy. Our 15 oz hammer swings like a 28 oz hammer! Weight of titanium, strength of steel!
No, no, no.
Advertisement
In my opinion, this was complete BS. Why are we talking about kinetic energy here? Is this what Dewalt and Stanley Black & Decker engineers believe, or is this just a way to throw some science talk at journalists that might have taken it at face value?
What happens when you swing a hammer faster? Yes, it hits harder. Does the nail heat up more due to frictional losses? Does it make a louder sound upon impact? Does it rebound more? These are all energy losses, with some directly related to strike velocity.
Momentum is what we really need to talk about. Simplifying things, linear momentum is directly proportional to mass and velocity; p = mv. So now, you decrease the weight of the hammer head and you must increase the velocity of the swing in order to match heavier hammer momentum to hit just as hard.
Again, simplifying things, if you drop head weight from 28 oz to 15 oz and consider the handle to be massless, you have to swing the hammer nearly twice as fast to deliver the same nail-driving momentum.
This is why I really didn’t like the “velocity is squared, and so speed contributes more significantly to hammer energy than mass” suggested marketing claims.
There are a lot of things going on.
Let’s use Stiletto’s titanium hammer for break-down purposes.
Titanium hammer handles generally offer better vibration-dampening properties than other materials, such as wood and steel. But let’s ignore that for a moment.
What contributes to hammer striking speed?
- Head weight
- Handle weight
- Handle length
The heavier the hammer head, the greater the swing effort.
The heavier the handle weight, the greater the swing effort.
The longer the handle, the greater the swing effort and faster the head swing.
For the best hammer design, you want as light a handle as possible, without compromising speed or durability.
The handle weight is the least-valuable contribution to a hammer swing. At this time I would also say that these are all just my opinions, and that I am open to discussing corrections or alternate theories.
Consider the Stiletto titanium hammers, Dewalt’s MIG-welded hammer, or any of the higher performance hammers released in recent years.
The focus has been on light and slender handles, with weight-savings up to the very top of the hammer head.
The moment of inertia can be summed up as the effort required for a hammer to be swung at a desired striking speed. In other words, the greater the moment of inertia, the more effort required to swing the hammer.
For a point mass, or the hammer head, the moment of inertia is mr^2.
For a rod of length L and mass m rotated about one end, or the hammer handle, the moment of inertia is 1/3mL^2.
So, when you swing the hammer, the weight of the hammer head and handle resist your swinging motion, lending to fatigue. While the weight of the handle does contribute to the swing speed as well, it’s less significant than the weight of the hammer head.
Look again at the Stiletto T-bone handle design. You have an I-beam shape and also two cut-outs where material – and weight – is removed.
For a harder-hitting hammer, you also want to tune the hammer head weight and also the length of the swing arc.
Consider two wheels, on with a 12″ diameter, and one with a 16″ diameter. Which wheel covers the greater distance in one rotation? Now, roll each wheel with the same angular speed, meaning you roll them at the same rotations per minute. Which wheel has the greater linear velocity?
Take two hammers, one with a 12″ handle and the other with a 16″ handle. If you swing them at the same angular speed, the longer-handled hammer will have a great linear velocity at the hammer head.
Ignoring hammer head or handle weight considerations, a longer hammer will swing faster than a shorter hammer. The angular rotation might be the same, but the swing arc length depends on the swing radius.
Stick out your hand and make a “thumbs-up” gesture. Now, keeping your joints straight, take one second to bring your thumb back down and close your fist. Your middle knuckle closes the distance at a rate of what, maybe 1-inch per second? What about your fingertip? 2-inches per second?
Ignoring most other factors, a longer hammer hits faster and thus harder.
This is also why you can reduce the hammer weight.
If you reduce handle weight, you can reduce swing effort. This means that you can achieve the same velocity with less effort, or greater swing velocity with the same effort.
Lengthen the hammer, and you increase hammer head swing velocity. If you can reduce the handle weight along the handle or at critical locations in the hammer head, you can lengthen the hammer without increasing swing effort.
If you fine-tune everything with a balanced design, you can even reduce the hammer head weight to achieve “feels like a 28oz framing hammer” types of marketing claims.
Many other factors go into hammer design, such as vibration dampening properties, and having enough mass behind the claw to provide sufficient strength for nail removal or prying tasks.
When Dewalt’s product managers first talked-up their MIG-welded framing hammers, the “you can reduce mass because kinetic energy relies on velocity squared” really struck a nerve, and it has continued to bug me since then. But on a positive note, it got me thinking about what happens when you start changing a hammer’s physical properties.
I could of course be wrong.
Let me know in comments about your hammer preferences and what you’ve learned over the years.
Big Richard
Have you ever golfed? There is something to be said about swinging a lighter, faster club and increased distance. Not a direct correlation to hammers, but I can see the claims having some validity.
Ross
That is absolutely a direct correlation. The golf club is a hammer, and transfers the momentum to the ball. the biggest difference is that the wood the nail is in pushes back a lot more than the air in front of the ball.
Stuart
Not yet, aside from mini golf, but that does sound like a great analogy.
Thanks! This gives me more avenues for theory research. There hasn’t been much publicly-accessibly data or research on hammer shapes and swing mechanics, but there could be a lot more on golf clubs.
Corey R
Ok Stuart, apparently you and I play a totally different mini-golf game.
But that may also be why I’m banned from so many places.
mla
We really need a way a “like” comments.
Adam Ellis
I struggle to believe it as well, but I have yet to meet a stilletto owner that hasn’t told me if it turned up missing they’d buy another one asap
Terrell
I’ve owned a Stiletto hammer for probably 16 years (bought a 2nd one for my son) and if I lost it today, I would have another one bought by the end of the day.
It’s easily the best hammer I’ve ever used and I’m terribly spoiled by how well it works.
Tim
Golf clubs and new hammers share a ton of engineering similarities besides the actual flex of the shaft.
Lighter with a larger head defeats heavier with a smaller head.
The length of the newer hammer shafts is similar to the flex in the club shaft as both are force amplification.
I can drive a chisel harder with a 12 ounce dewalt mig welded than I ever could with any old world hammer.
John Blair
All of these claims seem silly to me. The longer the handle, the harder it is to actually hit what you are aiming for. The faster you swing, the harder it is to hit what you are aiming for. Over time what happens is you build up muscle memory. When my grandfather was a carpenter everyone aimed to drive a framing nail in 3 hits. One to set, one to drive the vast majority of the distance and one to finish. It amazed me. Back when I was an electrician, air powered nail guns had taken over the framing. The only time people really used their hammer is when the job was too small to set up a nail gun or when nailing in strong ties. So machinery made the job drop from 3 hits to 1 trigger pull. Add in the great number of cordless nail guns and its hard to imagine someone driving in nails by hand all day. So sure, make a lighter hammer. If you are carrying around a tool you use sparingly, cut the weight but don’t pretend its “Just as good” at all uses.
Tom D
I use the claw end of any hammer ten or a hundred times as often as I use the hammer head.
Maybe Milwaukee needs to make a powered nail remover.
JR3 Home Performance
Call it a “nail sucker”
Bruce
Very insightful. This is probably the only reason I’d carry some super hammer.
King duck
Totally agree my dad and I just built a 36×80 garage pretty much by ourselves and for the hole project I bet we used a hammer for less than 15 minutes and that was mostly to persuade boards into position not driving nails. If Milwaukee comes out with a electric wire staple gun I’m pretty sure I will go months without touching a hammer.
Lyle
Try search YouTube for Larry Haun. I watched a framing video that he did and it was amazing. Most nails go in in just 2 hits.
Kelly turner
I hae been a carpenter for over 34 years and if you think pneumatic will ever take over the hammer i dont think so. Driving nails is a dieing art and the old guys will keep it alive
Juan
Nail guns are ok but nothing beats the strength of good’ol penny 16
Nails. When quality counts, but theses day, quality in framing is a thing of the past and 3 – 3″ gunnails do the job of 1 16 penny.
I have a titanium hickory wood axe handle stiletto for over 20yrs now and I wouldnt trade it for any other. hmmer.
Tony
I really like my 16 oz. Deluge titanium hammer with 18″hickory axe handle. Best hammer I ever bought. I vote vaughn/deluge
Terrell
That’s the same hammer I have and I feel the same.
Jcarpenter
One trade that uses hammers all day is guys hanging vinyl siding, unless they are trying to go on the cheap and use a stapler as you see in some new construction homes. You do have a good point though that hammers are used for a lot more than just hammering nails. That is one problem with the thin handles on many of these ne hammers. I’ve seen more than one DeWalt hammer handle get bent trying to pry something and I’ve done it myself. I don’t think it’s isolated to the DeWalts alone. That’s another reason I won’t use a hammer with a wooden handle due to how easily they break. I’ve had a stilleto tibone for 10 years and they are virtually indestructible though the claws can wear down. If I ever had to buy another one I’d definitely take a hard look at Martinez. They seem to be more inovative as a brand.
Jared
I generally prefer heavier hammers with shorter handles, but that’s as much as I’ve thought about it. Thanks for the detailed explanation and decoding the marketing fluff for me.
Mac
I use my 4lb engineer sledge for far more than its intended.
Patrick
Good that I’m not the only one. Probably a really bad habit, but it’s just such a satisfying swing.
Jared
Ha – I actually had my 4lb engineer’s hammer in my mind when I posted that. Not exactly a precision instrument, but its huge face and heavy weight can really sink a nail.
I have a few other hammers of various weights. I always choose the shorter and heavier ones unless I’m driving finishing nails.
Maybe I am just bad at hammering. I am not driving nails professionally though, so the weight on my hip is less important to me. I might carry a hammer all day for a couple days doing fencing around my farm or fixing up an outbuilding, but then not again for a few months.
Nothing I own is fancier than Estwing – so I really appreciate Stuart’s intention of explaining why I would want to spend more. I understand the sentiment from a few commentors that I just need to pony up, or I’ll “get what I deserve”, but the explanation that “lighter/faster is just as good” contradicts what I reach for. An explanation that doesn’t just rely on a testimonial is much appreciated.
Terrell
If you ever want to treat yourself to “something better”, buy a Stiletto 14oz/ 18” hickory handle hammer and use it for a week or two. It’s really a great hammer that will change how you appreciate a tool.
When I have to use my son’s Vaughn hammer, it never “feels” right, and it’s a good hammer. But not the same as my Stiletto.
Eric
You’ve got a typo above: Does it make a louder sound upon impact? That’s wasted injury.
Stuart
Thanks!
That’s more of a Freudian slip than a typo. At the back of my mind, lighter hammers and especially with reduced vibration transmission can potentially help to reduce fatigue and repetitive stress injuries to joints and soft tissue.
Jared
Except when you have to swing them wildly to get your nail sunk 😛
J. Newell
To throw another variable out there, how does any of this affect actual or perceived shock and vibration for the user? I always hated those old Stanley steel-handled hammers. They were literally bone-jarring. Stanley had some Pro series hammers with carbon fiber handles many years back – perhaps they still do. Analogizing to tennis rackets, the move from wood to steel to fiberglass and carbon fiber seemed a generally good series of developments.
Stuart
Wood is actually decent when it comes to vibration dampening, except some of those properties diminish as the wood ages and dries out. The move to steel is – in my understanding – more about long-term durability.
I really didn’t like some of Stanley’s AntiVibe hammers, if only because they rung like a tuning fork with every hit.
I tend to like Estwing steel hammers and Vaughan for wood.
I don’t know about other brands, but Milwaukee Tool does ergonomics testing for a lot of their tools that are in development, where sensors will be placed on test subjects’ arms to measure vibrational stress response.
The handle composition is largely influential on vibration transmission.
Carbon fiber is a very good material for this, which is why better photography and videography tripods are made from carbon fiber tubes instead of aluminum. It’s light and rigid, but also can be brittle and vulnerable to impact stress.
I asked Dewalt about any vibration-damping benefits in their composite hammers, and this is what they said:
https://toolguyd.com/more-about-the-new-dewalt-exocore-carbon-fiber-sledge-hammers/
https://toolguyd.com/dewalt-carbon-fiber-sledge-hammers-axes-exocore/
Also:
And so it’s not carbon fiber, but perhaps a carbon-nylon-fiberglass blend. Dewalt was perhaps purposely unclear about this.
J. Newell
Totally agree on wood as favorable for vibration – didn’t mean to imply that I had any complaints about wood.
Steel is interesting – I hated the old Stanley hammers mounted on what was basically a steel tube. They were indestructible (in my experience) but that was the only advantage.
The newer steel handles are another matter. I just bought one of the Dewalt MIG hammers (I’m slow…) and will be interested to see how it works out for me.
Tom D
Milwaukee does make hammers – maybe ask them?
Wendy
Nobody ever said which hammer is best…im trying to buy my fiance a birthday present…he is a framer..any suggestions
Stuart
If price is of no concern, https://martineztools.com/product-category/m1-15oz-framing-hammer/ .
greenmind
The act of swinging a hammer to produce an action at the hammer head is a complex mechanics problem and depends a lot on what the action is. The golf club hitting the ball analogy above is a pretty good example of an elastic impact – some kinetic energy of club is transferred to the ball (also sound, a little heat, etc), but the ball and club are usually not damaged in any significant way – no energy is lost to changing those materials. That is a fundamental difference between the golf club and the hammer – the hammer is doing some sort of damage – if it is driving a nail it is breaking and displacing fibers to create the cavity in the wood; if it is breaking up a plaster wall, it is using energy for the fracture process of cracking the plaster, etc. Most of the functions of a hammer involve energy dissipation in the form of controlled material damage, and the hammer’s ability to perform them would at least in some way be proportional to kinetic energy (mv^2) of the head of the hammer.
That said you are right that the momentum of the hammer is is also important to consider – will be related to the impulse or instantaneous change of momentum it can impart to what it impacts. So I don’t mean to discount your mv discussion. The real world effect of a hammer is probably somewhere between mv and 1/2mv^2, and depends on the work being done.
If you have research funding available my colleagues and I would be happy to investigate further 🙂
All in all great post! I use an ancient wood handled, steel head hammer made by Craftsman in the USA. And nail guns. 🙂
Stuart
I suppose that both can be true, depending on what we’re focusing on.
What are we really talking about in relation to driving in nails? The Force or Energy of the impact? My stance is that the striking force is more relevant, with contributing factors coming from momentum and angular momentum considerations.
Greg
Energy is energy – not created or destroyed. The energy of the moving hammer becomes the energy that creates sound, heat, moves the nail into the wood, bends the nail/nail head, indents the hammer face, etc. You can look at it as kinetic energy or momentum (or other methods) but these are all energy expressions so they should all be equivalent. I personally would think it is easier to quantify the energy as the moving hammer because then you don’t have the accounting problem of figuring out where all the energy got distributed after it makes contact with the nail. I suspect that is why Dewalt focused on the kinetic energy side. That being said, the more energy that gets to the nail, the likely furthur the nail gets driven into the wood. Some of this is in Dewalt’s hands (material properties, geometry) and some is skill of the person using the nail.
Stuart
Momentum is not an energy expression.
Energy is the capacity for doing work.
Momentum describes a mass in motion.
I’m not convinced yet that kinetic energy is appropriate (and if I’m wrong, please try harder!)
Angular momentum is directly correlated to the geometric properties inherent in high velocity hammer designs, and momentum is linked to discussion of a hammer’s striking FORCE.
Kinetic energy might be interesting to look at here, but I don’t think it’s quite relevant.
What’s different in high velocity hammers are their moment of inertia. That’s related to angular momentum, not energy.
Ken
Greg is correct. Work had to happen in order to generate that momentum, so momentum can essentially be considered interchangeably as a quantity of energy. When they momentum returns returns to zero, the energy has been transferred back out of the system.
Greg
Hitting the nail with a Force and moving it a distance into the wood is the definition of the energy. Afterall, don’t we want the nail to move into the wood? That energy got added to the hammer by your arm and partially transferred to the nail when the hammer hits it (other parts of energy went into sound, heat, deformation of the nail and hammer, etc.). I don’t understand your focus on momentum.
Stuart
Because I got stuck on an idea and was stubbornly holding onto it. Being wrong about something and corrected is how I learn best.
Jason
All I know is after swinging Estwing all steel hammers (16 and 24 oz) for years before getting a Stiletto is that I can nail just as fast, but my arm and wrist don’t get sore. I thought the longer handle would mess me up, but I didn’t notice at all after a few nails.
John Cashman
The kinetic energy formula really is most relevant to imparting the hammers energy to the nail. Its the same science, really, that explains why a tiny rifle bullet, under a quarter of an inch, can impart far more energy to a target than a bullet twice the diameter and four times the weight, fired from a pistol.
But all this works only in the hands of an experienced carpenter. Someone who can swing a 13 ounce hammer a lot faster than a 28 ounce hammer. Those guys can sink framing nails in 2 swings, where it takes my 6 or 7.
I’m not good enough with a hammer to swing that fast with a light hammer. I probably swing a 13 ounce hammer at the same speed as a 20 ounce. Skill, or lack thereof.
The other big issue is, these days most actual nail driving is done with nail guns. Hammers are used for other things. Need to coax a floor plate over a quarter inch? You need a hammer, and a heavier hammer is better for those jobs than a light one. Heavier hammers are better for deconstruction, too.
fred
Of course sometime a Pee-Vee or jack might be used in place of a sledge to move a sill plate. Sometimes it is easier to creep up on a line rather than hammering.
https://www.amazon.com/Qualcraft-2610-Big-Pee-Vee/dp/B0000VUNUG
Adabhael
Thanks for that Fred, I have never seen that particular tool, or that spelling. I am more familiar with the similar-but different logging tool, named after the person who invented it, and still made by their successor company in Maine: https://peaveymfg.com/
Those are nice, although I personally find a cant hook better matches my log-handling needs (easier to rotate, makes a great timberjack). I am particularly fond of the metal ones manufactured in Connecticut by Logrite . https://logrite.com/Category/Cant-Hooks-and-Peaveys
Stuart
I still feel that momentum is more appropriate for describing hammer-nail collisions.
Ballistics involves both KE and momentum. Consider a system where a target is armored.
Projectile 1: (1) unit of mass, (10) units of speed: 50 units of kinetic energy and 10 units of momentum
Projectile 2: (4) units of mass, (5) units of speed: 50 units of kinetic energy and 20 units of momentum
In ballistics, the energy transfers from projectile to target, but you still have conservation of momentum.
When talking about driving nails, really what we want to do is increase the force of the hammer strike. We can ignore nail-wood penetration, frictional forces, and even consider the nail as something that’s infinitely long.
Consider that the Force of a hammer strike is equivalent to the change in momentum over time.
The force will then be directly proportional to the effective mass of the hammer and its initial velocity right at the moment of hammer-nail collision.
Simply decreasing the mass of the hammer a little bit might only increase the velocity of the strike a little bit, thus having a small net effect on the hammer striking force.
Even if we could or should talk about energy transference, it’s still unhelpful to say that simply decreasing hammer head weight increases the impact velocity and contributes an exponential increase to the striking energy.
When you look at all of the little differences between high velocity and “swings like titanium” hammers, it’s all related to momentum, or rather angular momentum.
Decreasing the weight of the handle and also the hammer head contributes to a lower moment of inertia, which directly influences angular momentum. Yes, there are also energy considerations, but that’s not directly involved in describing the strike when it’s striking force that we’re interested in.
That’s what we’re really after – equivalent or greater striking force that’s delivered with the same or less torque on the user. In my opinion, kinetic energy does not come into play here.
Adabhael
I see what you did there.
I agree that at least this kind of statement prompted this fascinating discussion. It reminds me of a pseudo-physics argument I read about curved versus straight axe handles. It seems to me also that there is no free-lunch here: mechanical advantage lets us make trade offs among forces, speeds, and distances, but ultimately, all of the work the hammer does was power I had to provide, right? Of course lighter is nice for carrying in a belt or bag.
Stuart
That was actually unintentional – I mean… aren’t I clever?! =)
Hmm, with straight vs. curved axe handles, I was always under the impression that was more about comfort and to reduce slippage – I might need to look into that next.
Blocky
I’ve read different theories on this about strike angle, focused on the cleaving head, but I’m convinced the main advantage is less forward flexure in the wrist at contact.
Josh
A contractor buddy of mine has the titanium handle stilleto and love’s it. I hated my hammer and got a wood handle stilleto and that’s my favorite hammer. Guess a test should be done for proof one way or the other.
Steve G
Not to simplify the discussion to much but I’d say the hammer that feels right in the hand while not overdressing joints is all that matters. (Aside from application). Have tried them all over the years. Have a little dewalt and estwing for finish as needed and Martinez for everything. Martinez (and his first company Stiletto) are far and away the way to go for my way of doing things. Granted if you are a gorilla those 28s are great!
Mike S
Except that – when you swing a hammer, you swing it from where?
The wrist, or the elbow, or the shoulder, or from over your head with both arms extended?
It depends on what kind of hammer you are using and what task you are performing…
How does the length of the hammer compare to the person’s physical pivot point from which they are generating the motion?
In golf they talk a lot about creating “lag” in a golf swing. Lag is created by a hinge of the wrist during the swing away from the ball that allows the hands to get way ahead of the clubhead and then through perfect timing the lag is released as the wrist unhinges precisely into the ball at impact creating a massive acceleration of the already in-motion club.
Just like if you swing a hammer from the elbow, and cock your wrist back and then into the blow…
The length of the hammer is only a portion of what places the hammer’s head at the end of the swing “arm”.
blocky
I like this obervation a lot.
I do a lot of finish work and when sending brads and small nails, I pivot the hammer between thumb and forefinger, allowing for some bounce back, but always with the palm and three other fingers there to catch the opposing handle end on its upswing. If you don’t fight the rebounding energy, you can allow it to assist in creating the spring-back motion to set up for subsequent blows.
Cobblers and those who craft sheet metal with chasing hammers are particularly astute with this.
I also used to play the drums, and regardless of stick weight, an iron grip is never good for the nerves and tissues in your hand or arm.
Joshua horn
I have a M1 hammer…pricey yess… But night and day difference…. Makes Stiletto look like a toy. Martinez Tool Company has really put the research and design into this fine piece of equipment. When you drive large fasteners all day, there is only one choice.
Koko The Talking Ape
Other people have hit on this: driving a nail with a hammer is a complex action, and simple physics won’t describe it.
For one thing, the hammer is driven by an arm, which has its own limitations. A 1 oz. hammer would have the same momentum as a 16 oz. hammer if you could swing it 16 times faster, but you can’t. Your muscles, and even the weight distribution in your arm won’t allow it.
For another, as greenmind says, you aren’t just swinging a hammer, you’re driving a nail, and into material with resistance. For such a purpose, a heavier hammer might be more effective, but because of oddities relating to your muscles, it might be more tiring to swing a heavier hammer more slowly, even if you’re expending the same energy. Cyclists know there’s a certain cadence where you can drive the pedals with the most power (and a different one where you have the most endurance.)
For another, user skill, strength and endurance also play a factor. The best hammer for one person might not be the best for another.
So there’s probably a sweet spot where driving effectivess is balanced with user fatigue. And I bet it’s somewhere between 12 and 16 oz!
And all that is separate from the materials used. (If you want a lighter hammer, you can make one out of steel and save about $90.) Titanium has vibration-damping properties, but so does wood and fiberglass (though they are all different, in complex ways.)
I always wondered why they don’t make hammers with steel shot inside, like dead-blow hammers. That would damp out vibrations and prolong the impact with the nail. And there would be no rebound, which is wasted energy and doesn’t contribute to driving the nail into the wood.
Koko The Talking Ape
I meant to say, between 12 and 22 oz., in the range of most construction hammers.
Leo B.
The Estwing Al-Pro Shot hammer has shot inside the head; maybe you could see if it would work for you.
Link to waffle faced version-
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Estwing-AL-Pro-Forged-Aluminum-Hammer-ALBKM/300990244
Stuart
That’s been a round for a while, but I don’t think it’s been as popular as they expected.
https://toolguyd.com/estwing-aluminum-hammer-al-pro/
Leo B.
Yeah, similar to the Estwing weight forward model. I will give Estwing credit for innovation, though. They’ve tried some unusual models, and I think the industry is all the better for it, even if the models don’t work for the majority of users. Thanks for the link!
Koko The Talking Ape
And what do we think of the “Scrammer”?
https://smile.amazon.com/Scrammer-Scraper-Hammer-Nail-puller-Tool/dp/B00BQOQ4SG/
Daniel
Here’s the thing, it isn’t any sort of linear relationship to hammer weight/hammer velocity. For example, you can only swing your arm a certain speed, whether or not your are holding a hammer in your hand. This would be the maximum “hand speed” you can achieve. Obviously translate that to the end of a hammer handle and you get a theoretical “maximum” hammer head speed.
Now, you don’t swing a 2 lb hammer twice as fast as a 4 lb hammer because you cannot swing a 0 lb hammer infinitely faster than a 2 lb hammer. This is because of what I mentioned above. There will come a point where a hammer weight/geometry will be optimized for a given person. Above or below that and striking ability will not be as good. This doesn’t even take into account whether or not you can even hit the nail.
Nathan
you sort of glanced across it above. The physics of this comes down to Energy vs Momentum. Or go one iteration further impact energy vs impact impulse.
So yes energy 1/2 MV^2. Energy gets the work done. Incidentaly work is energy x time.
OK so if you put 2 hammers of different weights on a slinger (mechanical arm whatever) and one is lighter but moves faster there is a magic velocity where they produce equal energy. and equal energy will be equal work. SO in theory this works out. Lighter hammer can do the work of a heavier. Kicker – what is that velocity. So lighter hammers often have a longer beam to keep that up and they are easier to swing.
Now vibration – before we do that let’s talk more about impact. Impact is a momentum equation. that’s MV. no square and no half. and that momentum of M1V1-M2V2 (mass and speed of one vs mass and speed of the other) is what creates your shock or impulse load. For those familiar with guns this is your kick back. make the gun heavier or the bullet lighter less kickback.
Energy is what causes damage. Or in this case sinks the nail, or again for guns moves the bullet. Impact impulse of the momentum is what hurts your hand.
The bigger issue with titanium or CF beam handles is that they are sort of fragile – note here the heads are always some milled/forged Steel piece. The hit spot takes a hell of a lot of beating. I would never use a lightened hammer for any sort of demolition work. more likely to hit the beam – more likely to damage it.
pounding in roofing nails – would be nifty as hell but I can’t justify the price. oh and I would use a pneumatic nailer.
FixItChuck
As a mechanical engineer, doing simulation work for a large fortune 100 defense contractor, telling an army of designers where their design needs improvement (part time handyman because I need the exercise from sitting 10hr days and it’s a fun hobby).
Energy is by far the best way to examine this problem. Nathan had it right, mechanically speaking, you use energy (kinetic in this case) to perform work (force x distance). Agreed, there is loss in the energy transfer (sound, heat, etc) but generally it’s just a percent knock down, call it 10 or 20%.
DeWalt hat it right with their science and math, agreed there’s always room for some marketing BS in the math part. Overall it really comes down to where and how you assume the user is swinging the hammer..
Ultimately, what ever gives you the most street credit with impressing your crew is the hammer you’ll be using. Or just the bias…I just spent $100 on a hammer… Of course it swings harder and better than the $10 hammer!
Stuart
Thank you, I appreciate it! I’m budging from my stance – at least a little.
I do still think the underlying reasoning is sound, that part I’m not budging on yet.
Reduced moment of inertia -> increased strike velocity (and momentum) -> increased striking energy?
I suppose my problem with the original claims is that KE is automagically higher due to lower mass and a faster swing velocity, and that’s not good enough for me.
Ignoring whether KE or momentum is the significant factor here, is the velocity increasing by enough of a measurable amount for a 15 oz hammer to strike like a 28 oz hammer?
Momentum seems (seemed?) like a better way to think about things, but even if not, the question is what (else) is contributing to a higher swing velocity?
For a 15oz hammer to swing as fast as a 28oz hammer, it needs to be moving ~37% faster.
To have the same momentum, it needs to be moving ~87% faster. This is all assuming a massless handle with all of the rated weight in the head.
Maybe I should have done the math before I said anything…
I’ve been looking at this in terms of a 15 oz hammer that has had some material removed, rather than at the specific claim of a 15 oz hammer hitting the same as a 28 oz hammer.
This does give me more to think about! Thank you everyone!
Momentum and Force seem better for understanding strike motions, but maybe Kinetic Energy is what we’re looking for to compare impact performance. Which is more relevant at 1 microsecond prior to impact?
Kinetic energy allows for comparative work potential across different hammer sizes, and changes in momentum is how the influential geometric factors all contribute to a higher swing velocity.
I don’t think it’s all BS though – there are quite a few proponents for titanium and high velocity steel hammers, with most detractors I’ve seen being the ones who haven’t tried them yet. Some of them might be self-justifying their purchases or using pricey hammers as status symbols, but surely not all of them.
Ken
There is another factor to consider in this whole discussion I think you are overlooking.
There are human factors questions related to swinging a hammer beyond how hard it hits. Stresses in your joints and how hard you need to grip it to keep it from flying away.
Reducing the total mass reduces the centrifugal forces during the rotational ark of the hammer strike, which means less stress on your joints and less grip strength to hold it.
This can allow you to swing it faster at the similar level of comfort to a heavier hammer.
Stuart
That’s definitely on my mind as well.
The way I see it, there’s going to be a torque exerted on the user. A lighter hammer means the same torque can deliver more speed, or less torque can still deliver a little more speed.
Jkrl73
One more factor to consider is the size of the head. If you have a longer handle, you are less acurate, hence it is easier if you have a bigger striking area, leading to a heavier head. More velocity requires a more durable head, again adding weight. If you look at the shape of the high velocity hammers you can see these design considerations – large striking face with as little as possible material behind the head. I guess better steels and manufacturing allows less durability compromise.
I think the whole dewalt hammer smarts was big striking face on a light head, allowing for a longer handle. The same goes for titanium hammers – the same size of head but lighter (due to the material), and still durable.
BTW, it made me think of the smarts of old times. Can you think of a light material with good vibration dampening? How about…wood?!
The neck of american pattern hammers is also an old way of saving head weight while keeping a large striking face.
frampton
There’s a bunch of research on this subject regarding baseball bats.
Nathan
the issue with baseball bats and golf clubs that doesn’t apply to much to hammers is called Coeffeicient of Restitution. put another way bounciness.
Golf clubs and bats both deform and flex upon impact and golf clubs flex mid swing. Meanwhile the device they impact happen to also deform at impact. Ever see a golf ball on tee off in slow mow high frame rate? things flattens out to a nearly half moon.
I’ve not see the same type of video for a hammer on nail but I bet money it’s been done a few times. And I bet the nail deflects some too – but not like that.
OH and I forgot to tie up the energy v momentum thing. SO that mass and velocity is a factor in both equations. Note however that momentum it’s all of the mass and the velocity isn’t squared. the impact impulse is usually defined as the momentum over a time span – usually very short. So MV/t. ends up a m* d/t/t works out to F=ma. Momentum over time is done to create the impulse force. Or impact force if you will. that is what you feel against your hand/arm.
more energy with less momentum = more work less vibration/shock. It seems to work out decently. I don’t know I’d say a 15 oz works like a 28 but I also don’t swing a hammer nearly as effectively as a pro either.
Dave P
And you’ve swung one for how long, for how many hundreds of pounds of nails?
Yeah, I thought so.
Dave P
I’ve been busy swinging my Martinez hammer for 12.5 hours today and just saw this.
I couldn’t care less about the math. It has no interest to me at all. I doubt most who do care haven’t driven even a few hundred pounds of nails in their lives, because if they had, theory would no longer matter because then they’d have experience as their (absolute best) teacher. Theory is just that….
But I absolutely guarantee that a 15 oz titanium hammer will drive a large spike as fast as a 21 oz steel hammer with less effort far, far less shock and your elbow and shoulder will be saved in the process.
I don’t care if it’s a Dalluge, a Stiletto, a Martinez, or whatever. It’ll save your body (even if you’re only a busy amateur) and possibly your career if you’re a professional.
Take that money spent on fooling around with a plastic printer and buy yourself a good hammer…..
Stuart
It’s fine that you don’t care about the math.
When someone asks “so why should I spend $250 on a light hammer, I like my steel framing hammer just fine?” there needs to be objective reasoning. “Because it has a shock-reducing handle” isn’t enough. “Because I like it” isn’t enough. “Because anonymous people on the internet justifying their purchases” isn’t enough.
Are Martinez and Stiletto hammers really good, or are they more status symbols, proof that someone can spend 10X as much for a titanium hammer? What about all those steel “feels like titanium but a fraction of the price and still hits like a harder hammer” claims.
WHY might the higher prices on steel and titanium hammers be justified? You can’t always try certain hammers at stores. Nobody in one’s circle might have experience with a certain brand or style. Anonymous advocates on the internet might be self-justifying their expensive purchases.
I think I’ve found sound reasoning for why these hammers are high performing despite weighing less, but it needs to be discussed further, especially if I’m wrong on any parts.
Theory is fun for me. And 3D printing. And turning wood into sawdust.
Most hammers aren’t designed by people who have driven in hundreds of pounds of nails.
Quite frankly, understand the how and why behind different designs and then driving in nails for testing is easier than driving in hundreds of pounds in order to analyze geometric differences.
My role is to inform and explain, and to do that I need to understand, and understand thoroughly. I know how these hammers feel when striking nails, but it’s not enough, I also need to understand WHY. Unfortunately, objective testing comes with a very hefty price tag. Even if it didn’t, solid theory is needed to help shape expectations.
If you don’t want to discuss theory, it’s okay. Just like you couldn’t care less about the math, there are many – even a majority – of users who couldn’t care less about any hammer that costs more than what they’re already using day-in and day-out. Those users need more than a “trust me, it’s better” from anyone.
Dust
These are the types of posts that set toolguyd apart, I’ve been coming here for years and this is the content I enjoy most. Thank you for the years of objectivity.
Skye A Cohen
I too have a lot of interest in this topic. An old school framer with whom I’ve been working lately uses a 28oz hammer, I’m a small guy and always preferred a light 16oz finish hammer or when framing or doing a demo a 21oz but no more.. there’s nothing like driving home a sinker with a 28oz hammer. Light hammers titanium or steel are nice as belt tools, for prying and beating on wood but there’s no way that a 15oz hammer can compete with a 28oz hammer for driving nails.
I think the light hammers sell.so.well because people aren’t driving nails as much with hammers, mostly we use guns, hammers are backup, driving proud nails home, prying etc and a light hammer is nice in your belt and easy on your wrists, I’m glad there’s choices but for me it’s the fiskars 28oz when framing
Skye A Cohen
I should add, in my opinion: To swing a 15oz hammer fast enough to equal a 28oz in terms of “striking force” (hopefully that’s the right term) is far less controllable and takes more strength.
A 28oz hammer all day is tough on the wrists but not that tough if you know how to move it around without using your wrist against the weight. But there’s no way to avoid using your wrists and arm muscles in a way that is tiring to achieve the faster swings neccisarry for the light weight hammers.
Again just my opinion let’s not fight this is sort of a dicey subject.
Dave P
I’ve NEVER found a heavy hammer to be tough on my wrist, NEVER EVER. But on my shoulder and my elbow. YES YES YES.
The last thing I did before I bought my first Stiletto was make laminated columns for a pole barn at a site with no electricity. Big ring shanks 5″ long, 85 pounds of them.
Ended up at the doctor– he happened to do carpentry as a hobby and told me to go buy a titanium hammer (and a nail gun-ha) , preferably with a wooden handle. Which I did. He was right. (As far as the wood drying out and the wooden handle being less favorable over time; just more theory and real-world experience will show that to be totally unnoticeable even if it happens on paper).
When doing a complete project, meaning plenty of breaks in between nails for sawing, leveling, etc, I now use a Martinez. When I have a 50# box of spikes to sink, I go find my wooden-handled Stiletto.
Theory means nothing. The math is ALWAYS flawed to a point because of the real-world things that can’t be figured into the equation. But your shoulder and elbow matter!!!
Anyone who won’t pony up $80-90 for an entry-level wooden-handled titanium hammer will get what they deserve.
As a sidenote: I can tell an Estwing from a block away–that annoying “PING” on eat hit. Worse than fingernails on a chalkboard.
Glenn
I have to agree with people on how little nail driving happens with hammers on job sites now kind of neutralizes this whole discussion. I used a fairly large (24oz) Estwing steel-handled hammer (it was my grandfather’s) when I first started. It will destroy my elbows and I have to do a lot of driving to get my arms in shape to use it for any length of time. Switched to a Vaughn wooden-handled hammer with a lighter head (21oz) and it drives well and is much better on my joints and muscles. But I found I did so little nail driving. I mostly finish driving a nail that didn’t drive fully now and then, bang a board into place, drive a chisel and pull nails. So I actually went to an old 16oz wooden-handled hammer I picked up from a yard sale. It is light, I could swing it all day, it pulls nails just fine, I have much more control for chiseling, and its smaller head makes it easier to drive 10d or smaller nails into metal joist hangers. I do still pull out the 21oz hammer if I’m doing a framing job, but use the 16oz for most of my work. For me and my work, the antique $5 hammer wins.
Nathan
Yeah math only balances check books and makes your truck safe to drive. Biggest thing I want to point out –
as great at sinking nails that lightened hammers can be. Emphasis on can – there are design elements here. They are not meant to be do it all devices.
Like the normal steel beam, steel head, anti-vibration handled handle is a much more all around tool. And I say all around as in – knock in place, rip apart, all other general purpose functions most people use a hammer for.
biggest reason I don’t own one. If I built houses and refused to use a nail gun or construction screws I would own one. Hell if I hammered big nails weekly I would potentially consider one. Probably the dewalt to start it.
I mean hell I use a 80+ dollar ratchet when change the oil in my sadly growing fleet. SO I get the idea you want a better tool that you use often. and I see the appeal of the Martinez hammer. But I ain’t drooping that sort of money on one.
JR3 Home Performance
You must be thinking about it a little bit though. I mean maybe the Martinez will be collectible. Once you factor in the resale value it might change things. It could be a personal defense tool too. What’s a few dollars to experiment?
Dave P
Anyone who doesn’t use one just doesn’t know.
Period.
blocky
That Martinez is a magnifiently well-thought-out hammer. Not just in design, but in quality of fabrication. The cost of one is less than the cost of a single visit to the clinic with an x-ray for a wrist, elbow, or shoulder stress injury.
By the way, if you ever doubt the impact energy transfer of Titanium, just flip one of those Martinez a few times, and see how it hits the hand. (even versus a similarly profiled steel hammer)
I own one, but in the end, it ranks 5th in hammers I reach for. That’s because I’m not a framer or doing general construction, but it did take the place of my faithful 20 oz Fatmax.
Jeremiah Ducate
I didn’t read everything in the post and comments and didn’t see the dewalt ad promo when it was out. I have wondered the reason why light(expensive) hammers we’re still effective and figured it mostly had to do with leverage. Combined with nail guns allowing for less than optimum efficiency in exchange for medical damage.
Whether it’s valid or not the velocity vs weight factor never occurred to me even though it’s fairly common knowledge regarding firearms and ballistics.
Matt
I’m not a golf guy but it sure reminds me of the perpetual handgun projectile debate of slow/big/heavy vs fast/smaller/lighter. Both options can ultimately deliver the same energy so then the conversation shifts to ergonomics and recoil. The same seems to be true here. If you’re driving 5 nails (or shooting 5 rounds) it probably matters not one single bit. If you’re hammering (shooting) all day every day the issue of user comfort/fatigue understandably matters more. It’s also damn hard for most of us to wear out a framing hammer so a lot of this (I imagine) is trying to generate sales in a segment that doesn’t have a lot of repeat purchases.
MichaelHammer
I bet lots of people love their Stiletto hammers because of how much they paid for it. There is a direct correlation in the human psyche between amount paid and satisfaction. If it performs exactly as well as a DeWalt mig welded hammer then they will be most supremely satisfied that they paid triple.
Mike (the other one)
I think the biggest advantage of a lighter hammer is that it requires less energy on the reverse stroke – when you bring the hammer back for another hit. That probably helps reduce fatigue, allowing you to work longer, and maybe swing a tiny bit harder. This is especially useful when working above your head.
I figure the best hammer is the one that is most comfortable. Estwing and Vaughn are my two favorites based on comfort, price and features.
I also think it is good to have multiple hammers in different sizes, shapes, and composition.
Paramount
Here’s some on-the-job experiences:
I used an Estwing 20oz framer for 22 years. I love that hammer. In fact, I’m only on my second one.
Two years ago, I picked up a Stiletto Mini 14. I’ve kept both in my truck for the last year and a half, but finally went to the Stiletto only.
The titanium ones take some getting used to: they are physically larger, but lighter (at least in the case of my example). In my opinion, the Estwing works better for demo and general beating. The Stiletto shines when you have to do some nailing.
Granted, I don’t do much in the way of hand nailing an entire build, but the hammer comes out plenty, especially to tighten up gun nails in built up beams. I can feel an appreciable improvement after a day of work using the titanium vs steel. It may be that it dampens the repeated vibrations better, but it’s a vast difference.
For general beating work, I think the Estwing steel is better. The Stiletto shines on hammer to nail; I’d give the Estwing the edge on hammer to wood. I don’t really factor in the cost, because it’s relatively meaningless over the lifespan of a hammer, especially if you can keep track of your tools.
If a person makes a living with a hammer, it makes sense to do what you can to reduce the physical wear and tear on your body. I don’t have any experience in the so-called west coast framing, where they use the big framing hammers or even rig axes.
Thomas
I do a lot of different types of carpentry/woodworking from furniture building to full house builds (foundations to roof tops, rough to fine finish) , renos, heritage restorations. In doing so I use a few different hammers, from little wooden handle tac hammers to giant post driving mauls. on an average day in my tool box (some times referred to as the heap of crap in the back of the truck) I have a 16 oz finish hammer (old estwing one piece w/leather handle) 20 oz stanley ( standard handle length) 15 oz estwing ultra hammer (long handle) and new to the box is a fiskars 22 oz long handle. Looking to try the 19oz estwing ultra so if anyone has let me know how you like it. Also Im not one for nailing guns unless it is to put on sheathing, then they are okay.
The 20 oz was always my go to hammer as it was a good all around tool for the job, robust enough for dismantling and heavy enough to drive large nails. Started using the 15oz and it could keep up with the nail driving , after getting used to the length of the hammer, however the length of the hammer proved to be a problem in tighter spaces or where you could not get a full swing. I found if you had no room to swing the hammer the driving force was drastically reduced. Another issue I have with the ultra hammer is that the handle shaft is getting warped from pounding 3-1/2inch nails day after day with it, I can only assume because there is less material in the hammer stretched out over the length of the hammer. Enter the 22 oz long handle fiskars. Drives large nails extremely well , less swings = less fatigue, enough weight in tight spaces to drive nails when a full swing can not be achieved. down side is that it has really thick claws and a milled face, damages wood faces that are meant to be seen and like most hammers now has that dumb magnetic nail holder that puts a notch in the face that also damages wood.
So inconclusion, at least in my experience, the ultra hammers are great and do drive nails like a hammer of greater weight if you can get used to swinging the longer hammer HOWEVER if you can not get a full swing they are garbage, and are useless for demolition.
Phil
I didnt buy a stiletto for lighter weight or strike velocity. I bought it simply to save my arm. I own two. A wood handle 12 oz and a ti-bone 15oz. I have tried the dewalt and a variety of other hammers but am always back to the stiletto for a pain free swing. Whether its concrete formwork or building a bridge , framing a house or building scaffold my tibone have never failed me.
J
I can’t even comprehend the hobbyist elitism in this thread. Martinez and stiletto were designed by and for framers. Ask any framer that bangs nails and pushes walls around all day what feels better. Furthermore, the variables. Ie a A capable person that can crea te a fulcrum on both ends of their swing. the bottom line is No hobbyist should ever own a 2-300 dollar hammer.
Stuart
Justification and benefits depends on the usage, not whether one is a hobbyist or professional framer.
Martinez, Stiletto, and other $200+ hammers are agreeably difficult for most light users to justify. Someone that does not drive high quantities of nails, even if infrequently, won’t notice many differences over standard steel hammer designs.
Dave P
Well I am certainly not a professional framer.
I ended up at the doctors w a bad shoulder and elbow after driving 85 pounds of 5″ ring shanks in less than one week.
A bit of rest, and then back at it w BOTH a stiletto and Martinez hammer.
$400 for both, less than hiring a carpenter for ONE DAY.
Right now I am in the middle of remodeling my wife’s kitchen. I used the Martinez to do the demo as it’s steel claws stay sharp/don’t wear down like titanium, and it’s titanium handle lets me KICK it when pulling out a stubborn nail. Now I’m using a little 10-oz wooden- handled stiletto that I bought BRAND NEW for $75 on sale to put things back together.
Saving 11,000 over hiring it done. And I now have about $475 wrapped up in hammers, and can work all day without a sore elbow or shoulder.
For those of you that like the math, that’s a pretty good return.
Perry
That’s a great point Dave, and one that people miss a lot of the time. I’d rather have a “decent” hammer with good vibration dampening characteristics, over a great driving hammer that tears up my shoulder, elbow and wrist. $400 in hammers is a lot cheaper than a reconstruction surgery, which, after 27 years in the field, is what I’m looking at soon according to my Dr.
Paramount
Not everyone on here is a hobbyist. I own and operate a remodeling company.
I agree that it would be silly to buy a $200 hammer to hang a few pictures.
James
No argument will change the fact that at the end of the day I am not sore when using my wood handled titanium Deluge framing hammer. Hands down the best money I have ever spent on a hammer.
Matt J.
I think Estwing thought a lot about this when they designed their weight-forward models. It was never a super-popular option and pretty sure it has since been discontinued, but it was longer, put more weight where it helped, and was designed to make hitting accurately with a longer hammer repeatable. Took some getting used to, but when I break mine it’ll be a sad day. I have a bunch of hammers, but 9 times out of 10 I grab that for nailing (unless it’s finish work).
Dan Merrick
I have been hearing about the magical properties of titanium hammers for many years and I wish they did have miracle property but they don’t.
I am an engineer and researcher so the first thing I did was look to see if there was any research or testing with results to support or disprove the theories. I have never been able to find any published scientific data related to titanium hammers. In fact, there is very little concerning hammers at all which I find discouraging. The oldest, most basic and commonest tool on the planet and there is a dearth of research concerning hammer ergonomics. There were a couple of studies that looked at curved handles. The curved handle studies were pretty lame since all they did was have some students pound a few nails with straight and curved handle hammers. The students liked the curved handles better.
I am a rock climber and since most of my climbing is in wilderness areas and national parks, power drills are not an option for placing bolts so I drill holes in hard granite with a hand drill and hammer. Drilling one hole for one bold usually takes 15 to 30 minutes of work. It is really strenuous to do since you are usually standing on some tiny nubs and face a painful fall if you come off. Drilling takes two hands so you have to balance on your toes. The hammering is always overhead. It requires that you suffer a bit.
Since this is such an unpleasant process, I decided to find better tools to make it go faster. I did a lot of drilling with dozens of different hammers and found that the two main variables were weight and length. If a hammer is too heavy, you can’t keep pounding and the rest breaks you need to take slow you down. If the hammer is too light, the drill bit advances too slowly and it just plain takes too long. A longer handle is better (if you don’t choke up) but how long it can be is limited by the reach of your non-hammer hand since your other hand has to hold the drill and can only reach so far.
I also decided to try comparing steel to titanium. The biggest problem with comparing steel to titanium hammers is that there are too many variables such as weight, length, handle grip size, hammerhead shape, etc. Since I hand make climbing hammers (and sell them to other climbers) I made two hammers identical in all aspects except one has a steel head and the other has a titanium head. I went climbing with a buddy and sent him up a new pitch on climb we were establishing with both hammers. He drilled eight holes alternating hammers for each one. The lighter titanium hammer took longer to drill a hole – about 1/3 more time. This increase in drilling time for the lighter titanium hammer matched my earlier data using steel hammers of varying weight.
My conclusion is that a titanium hammer works just like a steel hammer that is of the same dimensions and weight. What you really need to do is find out what weight and length hammer works best for you. If your name is John Henry, you are 6′-5″ and 250 lbs. of muscle then you might like a 2 lb. hammer 24 inches long. If you are an average size guy like me, a 20 oz hammer with a 14″ handle might be about right. (my production hammers have a 16 oz head and weigh about 20 oz finished with the handle). If you are doing less sustained hammering, you might like a heavier hammer. If I am backpacking into the wilderness, I will carry a lighter hammer because the decreased carry weight is worth the extra drilling time.
Anyway, there are lots of theories about the wonders of titanium hammers but the proponents of those theories don’t have any evidence that their theories are right. Save you money and by a lighter steel hammer.
.
Scaffold builder
As someone who owns 3 different Stilettos and 2 of the MIG welded Dewalts, even the fiberglass Stiletto is far superior. My every day is the TB2, which I swing around 500-600 times a day doing scaffolding. The titanium’s ability to absorb vibration is a huge difference maker.
Ezzy
One of the most underrated hammers is from Hart. Unfortunately only available from Walmart now but Hart makes some great hand tools. Their hammer, crowbar, and wood chisel are all excellent. The crowbar especially looks different then every other crowbar on the market.
Joel
Force = mass x acceleration
Inertia – a body in motion or a body at rest will stay that way unless acted on by a force.
The force the hammer hits with is a product of its mass times its acceleration at impact . NB: acceleration can be negative i.e. deceleration.
How quickly the hammer can accelerated from rest (the beginning of the stroke) depends on its mass and how much force you can apply to it. Some of the force you apply will be used overcoming the hammer’s inertia. Heavier hammer has greater inertia to overcome requiring greater force which leaves less available for acceleration. A lighter hammer requires less force to overcome the inertia (either starting from rest or changing the direction of swing) so more force can go into providing greater acceleration which means greater force on impact.
By way of further illustration – take a baseball and rapidly move it from side to side in front of you. Then try doing the same thing with a bowling ball. That’s inertia.
So, a lighter hammer means less force is required to overcome its inertia which means more (of your) force is available to accelerate it meaning higher impact force i.e. harder hitting.
Also, don’t forget gravity. A lighter hammer needs less force to raise compared to a heavier one and that difference can add up pretty quickly.
Stuart
Angulation motion involves torque, not force.
Weight isn’t as important as the distribution of weight. This is where the moment of inertia comes into play. Let’s say you have two hammers, each with the same overall weight. One hammer has a heavier head and a lighter handle, the other has a lighter head and a heavier handle. The two hammers might swing differently, requiring different levels of physical effort to attain the same torque.
Now, the reason I say force – or torque – cannot be used is because we’re dealing with collision mechanics where there are energy losses. Frictional forces come into play, where wood resists nail movement, and this can be different depending on the type of wood.
You say that “more force can go into providing greater acceleration [of a lighter hammer] which means greater force on impact.” That’s close to the right idea. The idea behind high velocity hammers is so reduce its moment of inertia while maximizing its strike energy and head momentum. It’s not about decreasing the weight, but the *feel* of the weight. A decrease in weight often accompanies this, but it’s not the goal in itself.